are these two Dell 2007 monitors the same??

[jackvdbuk]

theres a £249 model on your site, which is VERY Cheap and considering to buy it

http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/Produ...oductID=503582

but on dell theres this one:
http://accessories.euro.dell.com/sna...dhs1&sku=59233

are these the same? as the one on scan has an 'E' before the 2007

and people with it, is there any problems with colour banding (seen it on a review site people having this problem)

would you recommend it?

[Scott]

Comparing the specs they look identical, not sure why the difference in model numbers... They do look nice tho

[dave87]

Don't they use different panels - ones the good one (in terms of image quality) the other is a good one in terms of response time?

[Trash Man]

Nope they not exactly the same model. The model from the scan link is the E207FWP, the one you have linked from the Dell site is the 2007FWP.

Main differences being the E207FPW is a 6-bit panel, so doesn't have full 24-bit colour (you'll get banding with gradients). the 2007FPW is an 8-bit panel and has full 24-bit colour. Also has less inputs.

[jackvdbuk]

Where did you get this infomation from?? there is nothing on the Dell site afai can see

[Trash Man]

Where did you get this infomation from?? there is nothing on the Dell site afai can see

I just typed E207FWP differences in google and there are loads of links about it. I could not find one that listed everything tho. Here are a few I found.

http://forums.extremeoverclocking.co...d.php?t=244989

http://www.genmay.net/showthread.php?t=701258

The main difference between the 2007wfp and e207wfp is that the 2007wfp uses S-IPS/S-PVA (true 8-bit) panel, where as the e207wfp uses a TN (6-bit) panel. Please note that the 2007wfp lcd also has:S-Video, Composite.

Im getting all this from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dell_monitors


TN+Film

The TN+Film (Twisted Nematic) display is the most common consumer display type, due to its lower price. The pixel response time on modern TN panels is sufficiently fast to avoid the shadow-trail artifacts that were a cause for complaint in the past. This fast response time has been a heavily marketed aspect of TN displays, although in most cases this number does not reflect performance across the entire range of possible color transitions. However this marketing strategy, combined with the relatively lower cost of production for TN panels, has led to the dominance of TN in the consumer market.
The TN display suffers from limited viewing angles, especially in the vertical direction, and some are unable to display the full 16.7 million colors (24-bit truecolor) available from modern graphics cards. These particular panels, with 6 bits per color channel as opposed to 8, can approach 24-bit color using a dithering method which combines adjacent pixels to simulate the desired shade. They can also use FRC (Frame Rate Control), the less conspicuous of the two. FRC quickly cycles pixels over time to simulate a given shade. These color simulation methods are noticeable to most people and discomforting for some. FRC tends to be most noticeable in darker tones. Dithering has the tendency to appear as if the individual pixels of the LCD were actually visible. Overall, color reproduction and linearity on TN panels is poor. Shortcomings in display color gamut (often referred to as a percentage of the NTSC 1953 color gamut) can also be attributed to backlighting technology. It is not uncommon for displays with CCFL (Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamps) based lighting to range from 40% to 76% of the NTSC color gamut, whereas displays utilizing white LED backlights may extend past 100% of the NTSC color gamut - a difference quite perceivable by the human eye.

Again, Straight from Wikipedia

[BUFF]

http://accessories.euro.dell.com/sna...dhs1&sku=78642

http://accessories.euro.dell.com/sna...dhs1&sku=59233

btw the E2007WFP is £233 on Today Only at Scan currently ...

[billythewiz]

Thanks Trash Man for that comprehensive reply.

I too have been looking at these monitors and wondering why a slower (responsetime) panel was 40% more expensive.

I want a widescreen primarily for gaming (I watch films on my TV ) so I'm guessing that response time is more important than colour quality.

Would you (or anyone else) suggest I avoid the 207 ? The £100 saving would allow me to get a second gfx card and go SLi

[Bobster]

old TN = 18bit
new TN = 18bit + 2 or (16.2mil)
PVA is 18bit
I-SPS is 24bit
S-PVA is 24bit
P-MVA is 24bit

if you see on a spec for a TFT that it supports 24bit colour - its not a true 24bit display, but if u see on the spec that it displays 24bit colour it is a true 24bit display its good init how marketing can get round the average computer user

[jackvdbuk]

caraing about how many colours it can display is hardly an 'average' user, a monitor is a monitor end of.. all that matters is screen size tbh..

but thx for that bobster good info, i had eventually found that out myself, that the e207FPW uses TN display... so the e2007 is a much better choice and even though it has a 16ms refresh rate.

perhaps its best to wait for the new version? afaik